GRILLADE, noun, feminine
A. The act of grilling. "One also had to endure the smell of the kitchen, the heavy scent of wine in the sauces, the nauseating grilling of onions in the frying pan" (HUYSMANS, Marthe, 1876, p. 62).
Yes it does, as shown by your own link. You translated the "A" part, which is the general definition. There is a "B" part dedicated to the definitions in the cooking domain, "CUISINE" is even spelled out in uppercase letters. The definitions there all refer to meat or fish.
Also anecdotally as a French native, grillade = meat for me.
Indeed ! But as pointed by the sample I provided, you can use that word to refer to the act of grilling vegetables, so there is no point in being overly particular about the use of the word grillade. If a word was already reserved for the designation of grilled vegetables, on the model of bus/car or train/tramway (ie /within a city/ vs /between cities/), I'd accept your argument.
However what's discussed here is a case of legislators deciding what shape language should take, not usage !
Not when the need is to increase battery life (reduce cpu usage). Having a couple of youtube/reddit tabs open in the background can really impact battery life I've found.
True only if your hours are counted. I don't know the ratio but I think a significant part of engineers are day-based wage, so you are just expected to work till 18h00/19h00, more if needed.
Btw, legal minimum vacation time is 20 days but 25/30 days is common and some can have huge vacation time (but lower wage).
I think I'm somehow in the same situation, trying to avoid industrial farming in benefit of local, small farming. I can know for sure (for some of them) that the animal was well treated from the beginning of its life to the very end.
I am asking myself if it is better for the animal to live a decent life even if it is to be killed and ate at the end or not to live at all.
If I want the animal to have a good life, why do I/should I get to (or even want to) decide when and why that life should end? It seems very contradictory to me and necessitates a need for the taking of the thing I’m apparently attaching value to.
Also I know I don’t physically kill these animals on a stop watch, but I vote for their death with my wallet. I don’t see a significant difference. Actually, I think it’s somewhat worse than it I carried it out myself. That’s why I generally try to only eat seafood that I selectively harvest while diving. I can guarantee the final moments were as brief as humanly possible and the rest of its life were as nature intended.
So, I really struggle with this one part where I decide the animal has worth and should therefor have a good existence. However, I’m also deciding it should only have that until I decide I want to deep fry its muscles or something. So it must be that I’m deciding to be a benevolent killer or something, which is certainly better than a ruthless one, but leaves me a uncomfortable nonetheless. I need to justify my own need or desire to continue killing, or at least profiting from the killing.
That’s the part I can’t do so far. Do I actually need to eat them? No, so far I really don’t. My health is still good after quite a while and the initial cravings have subsided. Do I want to eat them? No, not anymore, although I do miss it from a culinary perspective. Does that justify killing them? Well, would it justify killing someone’s dog if I thought dogs were delicious? Or any dog? No, never - the notion is absurd.
Well. I suppose some people eat dogs. This has a significant cultural element to it.
Nonetheless I really can’t bring myself to convince myself that I have any good reason to eat animals. Though admittedly I make an exception for fish and shellfish. I feel strange about that. I mean, when I get in the water those fish are arguably smarter than I am. One thing I justify the action by is that at least in the water they have a natural chance and environmental advantage. It isn’t a relationship of control and systematic murder from birth to death.
In time I suspect I’ll stop eating fish too. I don’t know.
The more I think about it the more it becomes an existential matter to be honest.
I don't see why your reasoning shouldn't also apply to fish and shellfish as it does to other animals?
> would it justify killing someone’s dog if I thought dogs were delicious?
That's a bit silly. Regardless of the ethics of eating meat, there are a whole bunch of other reasons why you wouldn't kill someone's pet. Just like you don't dive into people's fish tanks for your seafood :)
From Wikipedia: Universal 2nd Factor (U2F) is an open standard that strengthens and simplifies two-factor authentication (2FA) using specialized Universal Serial Bus (USB) or near-field communication (NFC) devices based on similar security technology found in smart cards.
Using Yubikey to mean U2F is like people saying "Google this term", "the image is Photoshopped", "Hoover the floor", "grab me a Kleenex", or even "take the escalator". It possible "Yubikey" could become a generic trademark, but if possible people should be wary of using brand names in this way before it 'sticks'.
Neither Photoshop, Kleenex, nor Google have lost trademark protection.
Additionally, the term Yubikey isn't likely to become synonymous with 2FA in any case. Most people don't know that yubikeys work in several different, independent modes, such as FIDO/U2F 2FA, or CCID smartcard, or Yubico OTP (those long annoying strings your yubikey types when it brushes your thigh or hand).
The CCID smartcard mode requires a pin, which is technically two factor authentication (knowledge of PIN and possession of yubikey), which is an entirely different thing than FIDO/U2F 2FA (which is what most people mean when they talk about using a yubikey for 2FA, not that "yubikey" and "2FA" are interchangeable terms).
This is further complicated by the fact that CCID smartcard mode can be used for ssh (via gpg-agent, with ssh keys inside the yubikey itself), AND, separately, OpenSSH (with other keys) can use a yubikey for U2F.
At this point, isn't comparing it to any non-Mac meaningless?
The only way to get an M1 is to buy a Mac anyways.
Unless/until you see a mass exodus of people from x86 based OSes the comparisons don't matter.
Sure, new Macs will be super fast, and that in itself will result in some conversions, but there are plenty of other factors that would keep people from switching to Mac.
> The project has a declarative approach of anonymization.
> Finally, the extension offers a panel of detection functions that will try to guess which columns need to be anonymized.
https://postgresql-anonymizer.readthedocs.io/en/stable/detec...